From: "Paulo J. Matos" <pocmatos@gmail.com>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: C99 Status - inttypes.h
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:43:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <j0c5fl$sm6$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110722112215.utk9zqjq0c0wss0o-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net>
On 22/07/11 16:22, Joern Rennecke wrote:
>> I have to disagree, library issue means that it's an issue with the
>> library, not gcc.
>
> It still makes sense to clarify the language to indicate that, depending on
> the library used, this might be, in fact, a library non-issue.
>
We might be interpreting this differently. When I you it's a "library
issue", I understand it as begin something that has to do with the
library, not that it is a definite problem with the library. Therefore
if I want to see what's the feature status I should check the library
documentation. I didn't think that saying it is a library issue would
mean that it is definitely broken/missing in the library.
Then again my native language is not english. However, by raising this
you're proving your point. If we can avoid different interpretations
then better.
> I agree that trying to track every library there would be a maintenance
> burden, but giving one example of a library that works is meaningful.
> And, since GCC is still a GNU project, mentioning the status of GNU libc
> doesn't seem that arbitrary.
Even just listing the status of a single feature from GNU libc might be
dangerous. You're duplicating information that's probably available in
the manual anyway and risk publicizing out-dated information. Also,
you'll need someone to volunteer to keep track of the status of every
feature in glibc that's listed a library issue in the c99 page. A better
way to do this if you want to mention glibc would be to link to glibc
documentation directly. Something like:
"Status of this feature in glibc <http://.../libc/manual/...>"
--
PMatos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-22 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-21 14:30 Diogo Sousa
2011-07-21 15:52 ` Joseph S. Myers
2011-07-21 18:13 ` Joe Buck
2011-07-22 11:05 ` Diogo Sousa
2011-07-22 13:03 ` Paulo J. Matos
2011-07-22 15:38 ` Joern Rennecke
2011-07-22 17:43 ` Paulo J. Matos [this message]
2011-07-22 20:12 ` James Dennett
2011-07-23 19:29 ` Weddington, Eric
2011-07-23 21:10 ` Eric Botcazou
2011-07-23 22:47 ` Weddington, Eric
2011-08-21 19:27 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2011-09-25 13:00 ` Joern Rennecke
2011-09-25 22:49 ` Joseph S. Myers
2011-09-25 22:53 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2011-09-26 7:11 ` Joseph S. Myers
2011-07-21 16:06 ` Basile Starynkevitch
2011-07-21 22:45 ` Ian Lance Taylor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='j0c5fl$sm6$1@dough.gmane.org' \
--to=pocmatos@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).